Greg (cc list). 

Thanks for alerting us to this video, which I have watched. I learned a good 
bit more from the pre-filed testimony and then reading the (not very long) 
bill. The bill authorizes (but not appropriates) mainly for a still not quite 
fixed indemnification process. I would expect the bill to be amended a bit 
based on the testimony. 

Like you, I think the witness testimony is not very encouraging. I have one 
friend closely watching the small number of available of CCS test results - she 
says the program is a disaster. You don't pick that up clearly in this hearing 
- but explains why indemnification is so important to everyone. It seemed clear 
that the witnesses were unanimous that any Federal indemnification must be 
temporary - and not be complete. Some liability now appropriately remains with 
the developers. 

I was surprised that there was only oblique (very negative) reference to the 
recent APS report on air capture. 

I think the whole Geoengineering discipline (this list) would benefit a lot 
from a little more discussion along the lines of this hearing. Different forms 
of both SRM and CDR would seem to have quite different risk (and needed 
indemnification) profiles. If that discussion has reached the same level of 
sophistication as exemplified here (especially the last witness), I have missed 
it. The (maximum of ) 10 CCS projects will have a total of $10 billion in 
Federally assumed responsibility. There was agreement that this is appropriate 
only at this early stage. (Not clear if this is a maximum of $1 billion each - 
or cumulative $10). Getting something similar through the UN for similar SRM 
activities appears daunting. I think there is a much smaller risk and need for 
insurance indemnification for the CDR areas that don't involve underground 
sequestration. 

Based on this hearing, I would now argue strongly that Federal indemnification 
NOT be requested/allowed for the REDD+ or Biochar forms of CDR. 

Ron 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Greg Rau" <[email protected]> 
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 10:35:40 PM 
Subject: [geo] Senate hearing 

For those interested, archived webcast of Thurs Senate hearing on CCS and air 
capture here: 

http://energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Hearings.LiveStream&Hearing_id=bc9e9485-df04-5fb0-8621-ac3afa2b26a6
 


But perhaps I can save you the agony of watching. The continued economic 
unviability of CCS comes to the fore (despite billions of investment), and now 
more is being requested to indemnify projects. Air capture is finally mentioned 
for a few sentences at about 51:30 into the session. No air capture experts 
were present. Very depressing given what's at stake and what little progress on 
CO2 stabilization has been made (and will be made) on the present course. 

-Greg 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group. 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]. 
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.

Reply via email to